What will be the best starting XI for England against India?

I am pinning my reputation (yeah I know thats not much), on the fact that Cook will be the 50 plus averaging England batsmen we've been looking for, since the sixties. He'll also have a top Ashes. So the man should be involved in all cricket for England IMO, particulary one form of the game that we're so pish at, and his two innings so far make him extremly unlucky to miss out.

Broads just not ready, a wait and see from me, I think.

Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.Walt Whitman

Yeah, scores of 275 can be got at Jaipur - Broad might be too big a risk.

The following bowlers for me would be a certainty: Dalrymple, Harmison, Anderson. Obviously, add Flintoff to that list if he can bowl - I'd also pick Michael Yardy. If Flintoff cannot bowl, replace him with Jon Lewis, Mahmood is too much of a risk on a high-scoring ground.

Yeah, scores of 275 can be got at Jaipur - Broad might be too big a risk.

The following bowlers for me would be a certainty: Dalrymple, Harmison, Anderson. Obviously, add Flintoff to that list if he can bowl - I'd also pick Michael Yardy. If Flintoff cannot bowl, replace him with Jon Lewis, Mahmood is too much of a risk on a high-scoring ground.

Wow, 4 specialist batsmen. 3 if you class Collingwood as a ODI allrounder.

IMO, Needs more firepower to score or chase big totals

That top 7 has played 348 games scored 10 hundreds and 56 fifties.

Based on this, one of the top 7 would score a ton once every 5 games and one of the players will score 50+ once a game.

Having (as a unit) 1 fifty per game and a ton every 5 games is not really a scary proposition for opponents.

I see your point, but Collingwood is certainly a bastsman who can bowl a bit rather than an all-rounder, and I drew that particularly up on the theory that Flintoff would not bowl in India, hence why both Dalrymple and Yardy are in the team. In my mind, that equals 5 players who are in the team for their batting, first and foremost. Also, Read is ahead of Geraint due to his current batting form, Dalrymple was a specialist batsman (I think) before he started bowling off-spin, and Yardy is another batsman who can bowl a bit. In my opinion, that side could bat and score quickly down to Anderson. And he and the other bowlers can nurdle quite well, I remember Anderson and A. N. Other whos name escapes me nearly getting to victory in an ODI against Pakistan last winter after the top order threw their wickets away.

EDIT: It's worth noting though, not "score quickly" in the same way that Pakistan or India will score quickly thanks to players like Afridi, Razzaq and Dhoni slogging sixes to all parts of the ground. Those England players would be a good team at hitting gaps in the field, and running singles with the odd boundary, aiming to get to a run rate of about 5. Dalrymple, Bell and Collingwood will never be power hitters.

I see your point, but Collingwood is certainly a bastsman who can bowl a bit rather than an all-rounder, and I drew that particularly up on the theory that Flintoff would not bowl in India, hence why both Dalrymple and Yardy are in the team. In my mind, that equals 5 players who are in the team for their batting, first and foremost. Also, Read is ahead of Geraint due to his current batting form, Dalrymple was a specialist batsman (I think) before he started bowling off-spin, and Yardy is another batsman who can bowl a bit. In my opinion, that side could bat and score quickly down to Anderson. And he and the other bowlers can nurdle quite well, I remember Anderson and A. N. Other whos name escapes me nearly getting to victory in an ODI against Pakistan last winter after the top order threw their wickets away.

Read, Dalrymple and Yardy have played over 400 List A games combined and have scored 4 hundreds and 28 fifties between them. Its a pretty poor record for 6, 7, 8.

No doubt the batting is long in your suggested team. However, it is very short on quality and match winners. 20s, 30, and 40s dont really win games.

I know that it's very short on match-winners - But from an outside viewpoint there seem to be very few of the big-hitters in the English game at the moment. Pietersen and Flintoff are the obvious exception, but after that the options are all untried and untested. Mal Loye? Hildreth? To put it simply, England's middle order is simply a nurdling one unless you relegate Pietersen and Flintoff down the order. In which case you have a top order without the kind of batsman you need to take advantage of the powerplays.

I know that it's very short on match-winners - But from an outside viewpoint there seem to be very few of the big-hitters in the English game at the moment. Pietersen and Flintoff are the obvious exception, but after that the options are all untried and untested. Mal Loye? Hildreth? To put it simply, England's middle order is simply a nurdling one unless you relegate Pietersen and Flintoff down the order. In which case you have a top order without the kind of batsman you need to take advantage of the powerplays.

And we come back to why I semi-seriously suggest bringing the ageing 'clown' back. Ali Brown is possibly the most destructive opener in the history of OD cricket.